Talcosis

I did.

Once again, you are conflating theory of state with individual choice.

Which also makes evident that you did not do the reading I suggested. C’est la vie.

I just set a timer

A critique of using the word totalitarian to describe specifically nazi Germany and the USSR. That is not the same thing.

In your mind, maybe.

Yes, I understand that you would like to change definitions that you personally dislike. But for the rest of the world, communists can be, and often are, right wing authoritarians. Although the more colloquial term is “tankie”. And yes, the word authoritarian has a clearly defined meaning in academia.

Right wing authoritarianism has nothing to do with the US political divide. It is called that because the French parliament back in the day had the monarchists/authoritarians sitting on the right side of parliament, while the liberals/anti-authoritarians sat on the left side of parliament. Many communists are right wing authoritarians.

One trait of high authoritarian people is the capacity for cognitive dissonance. This can be accomplished in many ways. I know, for example, that your definition of “mass democratization” is very different from what I would consider mass democratization. You have clarified this when defending North Korea.

The concept isn’t very muddy at all. It’s not even necessarily a bad thing to be authoritarian. However, highly authoritarian people often do not like being known as such. Interestingly, they would like to be seen as average authoritarian, while both medium and low authoritarian people think that being low authoritarian is best.

…yes. So you are a statist who would likely score fairly high on the right wing authoritarian scale.

Correct. You linked a critique of the use of the word “authoritarianism” in the context of states.

Except you did that in response to authoritarianism being used in the context of an individual personality trait.

See why I consider you a statist authoritarian? You defend state power out of context.

Interesting read, thanks.

@[email protected]

Hey, here’s a textbook example of the second bullet point I listed above: aggressive defense of what are considered the established authorities.

I provided reading on the psychological profile of an authoritarian individual, whether they be followers or leaders. Cow here immediately jumped in with an essay critiquing Arendt, who is neither here nor there. Matter of fact, Altemeyer focuses on Canadian and American authoritarians, because he was a Canadian psychologist. I don’t think he even mentions the Soviet union once in his book.

I don’t know if cow here even took the time to understand that I was talking about individual psychology before defending the state. Aggressive defense of established authority.

I don’t think you understand the word totalitarian or it’s variations. You probably understand authoritarianism, but you have a vested interest in not understanding it.

Try doing some reading, authoritarian personality is well studied.

theauthoritarians.org

Three criteria:

1. high degree of submission to established authorities
2. aggressive defense of said authorities
3. highly motivated by conventionalism

Essentially, yeah. I only experienced it once a while back while travelling in eastern Europe. There was free filtered wifi everywhere. Some of the locals said they had the same thing, but from phone plugs in their walls.

I guess the closest thing I can compare it to would be TV back in the day? You got the dozen or so free channels if you had an antenna, and then you paid for cable if you wanted the good stuff.

Wouldn’t check too hard if I were you, lol. Might get the attention of some folks…

Some places you get internet, but you’re limited to 3-4 “basic” sites unless you pay for it. Facebook/Whatsapp is often one of those basic sites. Or was.

That’s like…99% probably stolen from some Indian graveyard then…lots of bones used by anatomists back in the day (1800-1950)came from graveyards in india.

The reality is that stopping the genocide is not possible right now. That is why the GOP picked that as the culture war talking point: it’s a situation where there is no winning scenario for Democrats, and they can either call them the genocide party or the hitler party.

The options are: less genocide (Democrats) or more genocide (Republicans). Refusing to vote for less genocide because they’re pro-genocide just means that the more genocide side wins. And that’s what happened. And that’s why Israel is now actively pursuing the greater Israel project, because they know the GOP is fully on board with it.

And now the measurably worse outcome for both Americans and Palestine has taken place as a result.

No, my hair is glorious.

Eh, I think it’s probably movie dependent.

Example:

I recently watched Project Hail Mary and The Odyssey more or less back to back with family. PHM, I was climbing the walls halfway through thinking holy shit when will this be over, The Odyssey I was engaged the whole time. Both movies are approaching three hours. One of them is a good movie, and the other one is not.

Hey, they updated the script!

It’s funny that one can claim to be anti genocide, while being against any sort of attempts to stop it as well.

Eh, it’s an .ml, you can’t expect much